ebay_create_signing_key

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the crucial behavioral trait that eBay does not store the private key, requiring immediate saving. This is essential for agent decision-making, though additional details like rate limits or idempotency could be added.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second provides cipher options and the critical warning. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description provides all essential information: purpose, cipher options with recommendation, and the critical behavioral constraint. The sibling tool ebay_get_signing_key complements this by providing retrieval capability.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, signingKeyCipher, is fully covered by the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds value by recommending ED25519 as 'recommended' and explaining it produces 'shorter keys' while RSA is for 'legacy support', going beyond the raw enum values.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool creates a new signing keypair for API digital signatures, specifying the resource and action. It differentiates from siblings like ebay_get_signing_key by focusing on creation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Describes supported ciphers with a recommendation for ED25519 and notes legacy RSA support. The warning to save the private key immediately provides critical usage context, but explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like retrieval is missing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.